Clinton Essay, Research Paper

Whether or not to have the trial be held in public or private, symbolizes the trial. A simple question that is answered by common sense, made to just prolong a trial that serves no purpose, but to explain the bungling of two parities walking in the dark. At this stage in the proceeding there is nothing left to deliberate, no posturing left to do. Only justification is left, and now that to is done, with the closing arguments on Monday. Still the question at hand is whether or not the “jury” deliberations should be held in public or not. That should be the one question that needs not be asked. Why would we change one of the oldest and most basic precedents in our judicial system? The logic that most people use is “well, this is a special case” or “this to important to be held in secret.” But what case isn’t special. What case isn’t important. What about the case where a man’s life is in jeopardy isn’t that important. Does he have the right to see the jury deliberate? No. There is nothing more important for a jury to come into a deliberation, open minded and free of the shackles of preconceived notions and public opinion. That is the simple premise the precedent juries meeting in private were based upon. The senate should be no different than any other, after all the basic premise of the trial is this, is the President above the law. Again, no, either is this trial.